Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #272907 > unrolled thread

linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470 Rick Macdonald <rickmacd@shaw.ca> - 2024-09-06 20:30 +0200
    Re: linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470 Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@debian-user.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2024-09-06 22:20 +0200
      Re: linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470 Rick Macdonald <rickmacd@shaw.ca> - 2024-09-07 00:50 +0200
        Re: linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470 Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2024-09-07 03:10 +0200
          Re: linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470 Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@debian-user.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2024-09-09 10:10 +0200
            Re: linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470 David <curmudgeon@telaman.net.au> - 2024-09-09 10:30 +0200
            Re: linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470 David <curmudgeon@telaman.net.au> - 2024-09-09 10:30 +0200
              Re: linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470 Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> - 2024-09-15 21:10 +0200
                Re: linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470 Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2024-09-15 21:20 +0200

#272907 — linux-image-6.10.6 fails to build in nvidia-tesla-470

I'm running an up-to-date Bookworm desktop. I have an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 
760 (192-bit) using the NVIDIA Driver Version 470.256.02, coming from 
the nvidia-tesla-470 packages. I've searched this list and the package 
pages and don't see any bugs reported.

The 6.10.6 image fails to build:

Errors were encountered while processing:
  linux-image-6.10.6+bpo-amd64
  linux-image-amd64
  linux-headers-6.10.6+bpo-amd64
  linux-headers-amd64

I see the following in the build log:

/var/lib/dkms/nvidia-tesla-470/470.256.02/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h: 
In function ‘nv_ioremap_wc’:
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia-tesla-470/470.256.02/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h:579:33: 
warning: suggest braces around empty body in an ‘if’ statement 
[-Wempty-body]
   579 |         NV_MEMDBG_ADD(ptr, size);
       |                                 ^
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia-tesla-470/470.256.02/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h: 
In function ‘nv_vmap’:
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia-tesla-470/470.256.02/build/common/inc/nv-linux.h:666:51: 
warning: suggest braces around empty body in an ‘if’ statement 
[-Wempty-body]
   666 |         NV_MEMDBG_ADD(ptr, page_count * PAGE_SIZE);
       |                                                   ^
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia-tesla-470/470.256.02/build/nvidia/os-mlock.c: In 
function ‘nv_follow_pfn’:
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia-tesla-470/470.256.02/build/nvidia/os-mlock.c:23:12: 
error: implicit declaration of function ‘follow_pfn’; did you mean 
‘follow_pte’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
    23 |     return follow_pfn(vma, address, pfn);
       |            ^~~~~~~~~~
       |            follow_pte
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia-tesla-470/470.256.02/build/nvidia/nv-kthread-q.c: 
In function ‘thread_create_on_node’:
/var/lib/dkms/nvidia-tesla-470/470.256.02/build/nvidia/nv-kthread-q.c:180:5: 
warning: ‘static’ is not at beginning of declaration 
[-Wold-style-declaration]

There are a great number of warnings pointing at NV_MEMDBG_ADD with the 
"suggest empty braces...: message.

I think the "error: implicit declaration..." mentioned is what fails the 
build, although elsewhere there's a message "cc1: some warnings being 
treated as errors".

According to the "NVIDIA X Server Settings" GUI, the 
nvidia-tesla-470/470.256.02 that is failing to build is actually the 
same version that I'm already running now with kernel 6.9.7.

# uname -a
Linux timshel 6.9.7+bpo-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 
6.9.7-1~bpo12+1 (2024-07-03) x86_64 GNU/Linux


What can I do?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#272909

Rick Macdonald <rickmacd@shaw.ca> writes:

> I'm running an up-to-date Bookworm desktop. I have an NVIDIA GeForce
> GTX 760 (192-bit) using the NVIDIA Driver Version 470.256.02, coming
> from the nvidia-tesla-470 packages. I've searched this list and the
> package pages and don't see any bugs reported.
>
> The 6.10.6 image fails to build:
>
> Errors were encountered while processing:
>  linux-image-6.10.6+bpo-amd64
>  linux-image-amd64
>  linux-headers-6.10.6+bpo-amd64
>  linux-headers-amd64

Is there some reason to run the backport kernel? Maybe just run with the
stock Bookworm kernel and consider upgrading hardware before Trixie?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#272911

Well, this is embarrassing. I found in the bash history that I ran this:

apt install -t bookworm-backports linux-image-amd64 linux-headers-amd64

but I have no idea why. The timestamp of the deb file is July 18. I 
don't remember why I did this. Getting old sucks. Looking at the 
history, it looks like at the time I was having problems with 
pulseaudio, and it being replaced by pipewire.

Sorry to sound so lame, but I do I remove the backport such that it goes 
back to the stock Bookworm kernel?

Rick

On 2024-09-06 14:12, Anssi Saari wrote:
> Rick Macdonald <rickmacd@shaw.ca> writes:
>
>> I'm running an up-to-date Bookworm desktop. I have an NVIDIA GeForce
>> GTX 760 (192-bit) using the NVIDIA Driver Version 470.256.02, coming
>> from the nvidia-tesla-470 packages. I've searched this list and the
>> package pages and don't see any bugs reported.
>>
>> The 6.10.6 image fails to build:
>>
>> Errors were encountered while processing:
>>   linux-image-6.10.6+bpo-amd64
>>   linux-image-amd64
>>   linux-headers-6.10.6+bpo-amd64
>>   linux-headers-amd64
> Is there some reason to run the backport kernel? Maybe just run with the
> stock Bookworm kernel and consider upgrading hardware before Trixie?
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#272912

On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 16:39:46 -0600
Rick Macdonald <rickmacd@shaw.ca> wrote:

> Well, this is embarrassing. I found in the bash history that I ran
> this:
> 
> apt install -t bookworm-backports linux-image-amd64
> linux-headers-amd64

> 
> Sorry to sound so lame, but I do I remove the backport such that it
> goes back to the stock Bookworm kernel?

No worries; we've all done something similar. Well, except for the
wet-behind-the-ears know-it-alls. But that's why they're
wet-behind-the-ears know-it-alls.

Anyway, I seem to recall doing something like:

apt purge linux-image-amd64 linux-headers-amd64
apt install linux-image-amd64 linux-headers-amd64

You may want an "apt autopurge" in between.

You may also find yourself rebooting and manually purging surplus
kernels and headers packages.
-- 
Does anybody read signatures any more?

https://charlescurley.com
https://charlescurley.com/blog/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#272951

Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> writes:

> apt purge linux-image-amd64 linux-headers-amd64
> apt install linux-image-amd64 linux-headers-amd64
>
> You may want an "apt autopurge" in between.

That should do it although it's apt autoremove I believe but if not you
can explicitly remove the backport kernel image and headers.

Running dpkg -l linux-headers-\* and dpkg -l linux-image-\* will list
the relevant packages, rows that start with ii mean installed.

Backport kernels will have bpo in the version column and those are the
ones that are from backports and can be removed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#272952

On Mon, 2024-09-09 at 11:04 +0300, Anssi Saari wrote:
> Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> writes:
> 
> > apt purge linux-image-amd64 linux-headers-amd64
> > apt install linux-image-amd64 linux-headers-amd64
> > 
> > You may want an "apt autopurge" in between.
> 
> That should do it although it's apt autoremove 

`apt auto-remove'

Cheers!
> I believe but if not you
> can explicitly remove the backport kernel image and headers.
> 
> Running dpkg -l linux-headers-\* and dpkg -l linux-image-\* will list
> the relevant packages, rows that start with ii mean installed.
> 
> Backport kernels will have bpo in the version column and those are
> the
> ones that are from backports and can be removed.
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#272953

On Mon, 2024-09-09 at 11:04 +0300, Anssi Saari wrote:
> Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> writes:
> 
> > apt purge linux-image-amd64 linux-headers-amd64
> > apt install linux-image-amd64 linux-headers-amd64
> > 
> > You may want an "apt autopurge" in between.
> 
> That should do it although it's apt autoremove 

`apt auto-remove'

Cheers!
> I believe but if not you
> can explicitly remove the backport kernel image and headers.
> 
> Running dpkg -l linux-headers-\* and dpkg -l linux-image-\* will list
> the relevant packages, rows that start with ii mean installed.
> 
> Backport kernels will have bpo in the version column and those are
> the
> ones that are from backports and can be removed.
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273089

Am 09.09.24 um 10:27 schrieb David:

> `apt auto-remove'

You generally might want apt --purge auto-remove
This also cleans up configuration files.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#273090

On Sun, 15 Sep 2024 21:04:18 +0200
Christian Britz <cbritz@t-online.de> wrote:

> Am 09.09.24 um 10:27 schrieb David:
> 
> > `apt auto-remove'  
> 
> You generally might want apt --purge auto-remove
> This also cleans up configuration files.

Which is the same as "apt autopurge", which I suggested earlier in this
thread.

-- 
Does anybody read signatures any more?

https://charlescurley.com
https://charlescurley.com/blog/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web